Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
TSA Go After Pilot At Home; Harrassment Over Video  
User currently offlinefxramper From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 7305 posts, RR: 85
Posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 16082 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The big government is throwing it's weight around. Seems Homeland Security and TSA didn't like the videos a SMF area pilot made while he was at SFO. The guy posted them on Youtube showing how pilots and flight crew have to get wanded by TSA, but ground staff just use a swipe card to get access 'from the street to the ramp'. Wonder how Pistole is going to juggle this one.

http://www.news10.net/news/article.a...ryid=113529&provider=top&catid=188

58 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinewindy95 From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 2738 posts, RR: 8
Reply 1, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 16013 times:

It is another disgusting move by DHS. He tells the truth and gets punished


OMG-Obama Must Go
User currently offlinemccarranmgr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 15925 times:

I am usually the first one to bash DHS/TSA. However in this case the video he recorded is considered SSI (Sensitive Security Information). Basically SSI is not to be shared with the general public, and that’s just what he did. Should they have gone to his home, probably not? He should however be reprimanded for his actions.

A lot of people are again raising a fuss about Airport/Airline employees not being 100% screened when accessing the SIDA. The fact is no major airport in the USA could operate if they decided to screen 100% of the employees that access the SIDA. It simply is not possible. Badged employees must go threw extensive background checks etc, so they are cleared to work in certain areas.

I find it interesting that this pilot is complaining about employees working the ramp/airport not being screened, when the odds are he is not subject to screening at his basedairport where he also holds a local badge.


User currently offlinepar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7308 posts, RR: 8
Reply 3, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 15893 times:

Well in no particular order.
1. Is there a prohibition for taking videos in the secured area where screening takes place?
2. If this pilot noted area's of weakness, did he first notify the authorities in writing before going public?

This pilot had additional responsibilities, he was allowed to carry a weapon in the cockpit. I have no problem with folks taking things public where safety is concerned AFTER the normal procedures have failed. The US is not a dictatorship, even though some bodies act like one, in most organizations there are ways to air greviances, and where none exits, laws and the US constitution are available, heck, he could even have taken this video to his local representative before going to You Tube of all places, maybe even the FBI since a Federal Agency is involved, unless the taking of the video was against the rules and he was afraid of punishment?


User currently offlinefxramper From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 7305 posts, RR: 85
Reply 4, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 15723 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting par13del (Reply 3):
could even have taken this video to his local representative before going to You Tube of all places,

I agree, but the 'send Paulie to the house and break your knees attitude' is way out of line. There are guys out there still carrying their duty weapons that are facing a lot more severe circumstances and TSA goes after the critic instead.

  


User currently onlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9438 posts, RR: 30
Reply 5, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 15674 times:

Quoting mccarranmgr (Reply 2):
A lot of people are again raising a fuss about Airport/Airline employees not being 100% screened when accessing the SIDA. The fact is no major airport in the USA could operate if they decided to screen 100% of the employees that access the SIDA. It simply is not possible. Badged employees must go threw extensive background checks etc, s

If that is so, the DHS must be doing something wrong (not that that would be a new informaiton). Whoever is accessing the red badge zone in Germany (and in other European countries as well,) is checked each time he/she enters. That can be several times daily and airports are operating perfectly well. Which proves that it os very much possible.

Background checks are performed here as well and with our system and these are much more efficient here as we cannot simply adapt a false identity as easy as in the USA.

With statements like the above, it proves again that airport "security" in the USA is just a mock up harassing innocent people by the millions daily without any positive result.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlinesrbmod From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 15548 times:

Quoting mccarranmgr (Reply 2):
A lot of people are again raising a fuss about Airport/Airline employees not being 100% screened when accessing the SIDA. The fact is no major airport in the USA could operate if they decided to screen 100% of the employees that access the SIDA. It simply is not possible. Badged employees must go threw extensive background checks etc, so they are cleared to work in certain areas.

I find it interesting that this pilot is complaining about employees working the ramp/airport not being screened, when the odds are he is not subject to screening at his basedairport where he also holds a local badge.

Airports would have to build separate facilities to screen all airline and airport employees and in the current economic climate, nobody has the money to build such a facility. At a major airport like ATL, you would need a building practically the size of a hangar to screen every airline employee that would be coming in through for their shifts. One would conceivably have to arrive for work at least an hour or so prior to your shift in order to have enough time to catch the employee bus and undergo a security screening. Even if the shifts are staggered (One group comes in at say 3 PM, the next at 3:30 PM, the next at 4 PM, the last group comes in at 4:30 PM.), you'd have to show up for work at least an hour before your shift. That's time out of your life that you're not getting paid for.

My days in the airline industry predate 9/11 and back then, ATL based flight crews were not subject to screening. It's definitely still the case, as on occasion, I'm near some of the airline employee lots at ATL and you see flight crews pulling into or out of those lots. I did work at ATL for a few years for a vendor and the only times we ever had to go through the screening process was if we had to leave the concourses and go to something in the terminal building (usually when we had to go renew our SIDA badges or take new hires to the security office to start the process to get their SIDA badge). The rest of the time, we accessed the airport through a gate and all they checked was our badges, the vehicle passes and the tag number of the vehicle. Our loads were never inspected, even when the vehicle being used was a pickup truck or a small van.

It is not completely feasible or viable to screen everybody and everything that enters the secured areas without seriously impacting airports.

All employees with SIDA badges for the airport they work at are subject to screening at anytime by the TSA. Random screenings of airline employees is the only practical way to screen employees.


User currently offlinebinmonster From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 215 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 15504 times:

For you all, that work at an airport, you who, why and when someone can by-pass security.
IMO this is only a pilot that has an issue that flight crews have to face security. Hey look at me, I carry a fire arm and I’m at the controls of an aircraft. This guy would have keeped his head in the clouds and never looked at ground security until his position was insulted by having to go through security.

Does this guy really want everybody that works at an airport to go through the checkpoint? Or does he want the hotel van driver to deliver him plane side while by passing security? Or maybe a pilot only bypass lane at every airport.

So how many ground crews downed an aircraft ? PSA, How may pilots have downed an aircraft ? Egypt Air


User currently offlinePHLJJS From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 417 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 15369 times:

Quoting mccarranmgr (Reply 2):
I find it interesting that this pilot is complaining about employees working the ramp/airport not being screened, when the odds are he is not subject to screening at his based airport where he also holds a local badge.

I also found that interesting. It's a bit like the pot calling the kettle black, since whenever he has his FFDO gun with him, he gets to bypass security at any airport, not just his home airport where he likely holds a SIDA badge.


User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6690 posts, RR: 12
Reply 9, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 15261 times:

Quoting PHLJJS (Reply 11):
I also found that interesting. It's a bit like the pot calling the kettle black, since whenever he has his FFDO gun with him, he gets to bypass security at any airport, not just his home airport where he likely holds a SIDA badge.

Maybe he got the gun for that purpose ?

When you think there were illegal prayer rooms under CDG and ORY, you'd have to hope the staff was screened and not just vetted. After all, you can enter the job being a fine citizen and change over time...



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlinecbphoto From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1561 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 15147 times:

Quoting Aesma (Reply 14):
Maybe he got the gun for that purpose ?

Bingo, many of the FFDOs I have spoken to, have gone through the training and deal with the hassles of being an FFDO simply just to bypass security. It is nice to never have to walk through a x-ray machine, or deal with the TSA ever again.



ETOPS: Engines Turning or Passengers Swimming
User currently offlinefxramper From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 7305 posts, RR: 85
Reply 11, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 15144 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting mccarranmgr (Reply 2):
Badged employees must go threw extensive background checks etc, so they are cleared to work in certain areas.

Do you know how 'extensive' the background screen is that airlines conduct to get employees an airport SIDA badge? I can tell you it's not extensive at all and probably shouldn't be called a background check either because it's far from that. A traditional background check costs thousands of dollars and covers many pre-hire areas that take weeks to get information on.

[Edited 2010-12-24 08:58:00]

User currently offlineacjflyer From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 427 posts, RR: 6
Reply 12, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 15100 times:

Quoting mccarranmgr (Reply 2):
A lot of people are again raising a fuss about Airport/Airline employees not being 100% screened when accessing the SIDA. The fact is no major airport in the USA could operate if they decided to screen 100% of the employees that access the SIDA. It simply is not possible. Badged employees must go threw extensive background checks etc, so they are cleared to work in certain areas.

Many airports in the US screen 100% of the employees. I work in one of them and as much as it can get annoying to go through screening everyday you get used to it and realize it is all part of the job.

As for the employees being badged and screened - lets remember that the employee that was screened and cleared with a SIDA badge in Denver driving the employee shuttle was the man that tried to detonate a bomb in Times square, or how about the US Airways badged employee that handed his friend a gun to take on the flight from PHL-PHX.

How do you explain that system? I think there is much to be improved upon and as much as 100% screening of employees is a hassle I can see the importance in it.


User currently offlineSPREE34 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 2248 posts, RR: 9
Reply 13, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 15058 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 5):
it proves again that airport "security" in the USA is just a mock up harassing innocent people by the millions daily without any positive result.


         Here we have the winning statement. Enough already. More people are killed in the US every year by cars, than in any terrorist action.

Quoting PHLJJS (Reply 8):
since whenever he has his FFDO gun with him, he gets to bypass security

Bypass Security. Duh. He has passed the psychological profiling etc to carry the weapon. A Cop, Secret Service, DEA, ATF etc etc etc can bypass security. What would be the point in these people being screened at checkpoints? Maybe I missed your point.



I don't understand everything I don't know about this.
User currently offlineCrewchief From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 15051 times:

Quoting par13del (Reply 3):
SSI (Sensitive Security Information

Enlighten me, please. What exactly is SSI. It's not "Top Secret". It's not secret enough to be "Secret". And it's not "Sensitive". And it's not any other security label.

It's not in use by any other department and agency. To obtain access to SSI information, someone has to answer an advertisement on a pizza box or gas pump. SSI is known by over forty-thousand screeners, screeners who have a turnover rate that is outlandish. And it's known to tens of thousands of others.

Some SSI is displayed openly to non-cleared personnel, as in a pat down. The TSA can't publish how a patdown should be done because it's SSI, but they openly perform it on millions. Or what about surrounding a recalcitrant fare with TSOs. Evidently SSI is so important to keep confidential that anyone who observes a screening area can see some of it.

So, what is SSI, and why send Bruno and Guido to someone's house if they disclose a very small piece of it?


User currently offlinesrbmod From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 15036 times:

Quoting acjflyer (Reply 12):
Many airports in the US screen 100% of the employees. I work in one of them and as much as it can get annoying to go through screening everyday you get used to it and realize it is all part of the job.

Those that do are mostly smaller airports with nowhere near the number of employees of say JFK, IAD, ATL, SFO, LAS, ORD, or LAX. 100% screening is easy to have at a small airport with a handful of flights a day.

Quoting fxramper (Reply 11):
Do you know how 'extensive' the background screen is that airlines conduct to get employees an airport SIDA badge? I can tell you it's not extensive at all and probably shouldn't be called a background check either because it's far from that. A traditional background check costs thousands of dollars and covers many pre-hire areas that take weeks to get information on.

It's still more intensive than the standard background check that most employers outside of the airline industry. The typical background check that is run goes back three to maybe five years. The background check that someone applying for an airport SIDA badge goes back 10 years and you have to completely account for the entire 10 year period, including periods of unemployment (typically if more than a month) as well as periods in which one may have been in school and not working. You have to provide a reference to verify those periods in which you were not working.


User currently offlineJRadier From Netherlands, joined Sep 2004, 4702 posts, RR: 50
Reply 16, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 14988 times:

Quoting srbmod (Reply 6):

It is not completely feasible or viable to screen everybody and everything that enters the secured areas without seriously impacting airports.

As panHam said, we are doing it in Europe already! My home airport, Schiphol, has several checkpoints set up and ALL persons and vehicles (excluding law enforcement) are checked! Even during shift changes I never had to wait more than 15 minutes to get airside. Normally it takes me 1-2 minutes when I am on foot and 2-5 minutes when I bring a car. That said, I have yet to see a 'serious impact' on airport operations.



For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and ther
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5629 posts, RR: 8
Reply 17, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 14984 times:

Quoting srbmod (Reply 15):
It's still more intensive than the standard background check that most employers outside of the airline industry. The typical background check that is run goes back three to maybe five years. The background check that someone applying for an airport SIDA badge goes back 10 years and you have to completely account for the entire 10 year period, including periods of unemployment (typically if more than a month) as well as periods in which one may have been in school and not working. You have to provide a reference to verify those periods in which you were not working.

But do they verify the accounting of the time and interview the people surrounding the person in that time? That's the only way it can be called a "check", you have to actually check out the what the person claims and who they are. If they just take the written word of the person or only "check" randomly then it is only a "screening" and not a check.

The whole idea of security and a background check is to know who the person is and what the did and whether they pose any type of threat and are who they claim they are and fit the person-type needed for the job/position being screened for.

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlinespartanmjf From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 503 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 14960 times:

It is TSA - these are the people who grope middle aged men, strip little boys, and put grandma through the wringer on a daily basis.....why should this surprise anyone?


"Nuts to the man in 21D!"
User currently offlinedeltadart106 From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 32 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 14940 times:

Yeah, going after him because they don't want their ways exposed. Why "check" the pilot? If he/she really wanted to crash the plane, they could just crash it into the ground as long as the FO didn't stop them (or they were in on it). The ground crew could do MUCH more to a plane and potentially get away with it (even if they were checked) so I don't think a TSA "scan" makes much of a difference.

User currently offlinecbphoto From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1561 posts, RR: 5
Reply 20, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 14912 times:

Quoting SPREE34 (Reply 13):
Bypass Security. Duh. He has passed the psychological profiling etc to carry the weapon. A Cop, Secret Service, DEA, ATF etc etc etc can bypass security. What would be the point in these people being screened at checkpoints? Maybe I missed your point.

Exactly. Just remember, an FFDO IS a Federal Officer, and will go through the same background procedures and interviews as most other Federal law enforcement officers. Also, when it comes to TSA and security, an FFDO will follow the same procedures as any other Federal (or Local) LEO (Law Enforcement Officer) that is required to travel with a gun. The fact that this pilot was an FFDO is really not relevant. He was trying to point out that it is easier for a ramper to have access to the aircraft, then a pilot to access his own flight deck. If anything at all, it should be the other way around. Pilots should have free access to their aircraft and rampers and other ground employees should have to go through security.

Egypt Air is a perfect example of that. If we wanted to do harm to the aircraft, we would not need a weapon, or bomb or anything. We have all we need, our hands and access to the aircraft at critical stages of flight. The system is backwards and I think that this country needs a program like crew pass or something, so all pilots and crew members get to bypass the charade of going through security!



ETOPS: Engines Turning or Passengers Swimming
User currently offlinesrbmod From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 14771 times:

Quoting tugger (Reply 17):

But do they verify the accounting of the time and interview the people surrounding the person in that time? That's the only way it can be called a "check", you have to actually check out the what the person claims and who they are. If they just take the written word of the person or only "check" randomly then it is only a "screening" and not a check.

The whole idea of security and a background check is to know who the person is and what the did and whether they pose any type of threat and are who they claim they are and fit the person-type needed for the job/position being screened for.

Yes they do. At my last job, there were several employees over the two years I was there that had their approvals for a SIDA badge delayed due to some problems getting some of the information they provided verified. This was a few years after 9/11. It took one guy close to a month to get something that raised a red flag cleared because someone along the way a few years prior failed to take action on a matter and as a result, something that they thought had been expunged from their records was still on their records. I know when I had applied for my SIDA badge, they called the references I listed in order to verify the gaps in employment.

Years earlier when I worked for ASA and for AirTran, there were people in my training class that had parts of their background check flagged and needed to clear up before they could be given a SIDA badge and continue their training (Although in some cases, I guess the issue was something that disqualified them from the position because they had not disclosed it on the application.). I even had a slight bump when I applied for my SIDA badge when I went to work at ASA as they needed to verify when my employment had ended at AirTran.


User currently offlineridgid727 From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 1148 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 14771 times:

Disgruntled or derranged employees of airlines have caused crashes in the past. the FedEx employee, the PSA Bae146, the Egypt Air co-pilot etc. So as disgruntled employees go, that want to strike back, - I wonder what iwll happen at the TSA when one of their finest decides to break their code of ethics and breech the very ting they are there for, and casue meyhem on a flight. Its just a matter of time before that happens as they do not screen their on duty staff.

User currently offlinetozairport From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 686 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 14229 times:

Quoting binmonster (Reply 7):
So how many ground crews downed an aircraft ? PSA, How may pilots have downed an aircraft ? Egypt Air

Yeah, except in the PSA crash the guy would have been caught if he had gone through security. No amount of physical screening would have stopped the Egypt Air crash. I think that's the whole point. TSA/DHS has everything backwards, but that's not a real shock.



Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
User currently offlinecloudyapple From Hong Kong, joined Jul 2005, 2454 posts, RR: 10
Reply 24, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 13985 times:

Quoting srbmod (Reply 6):
At a major airport like ATL, you would need a building practically the size of a hangar to screen every airline employee that would be coming in through for their shifts.

If Heathrow can screen EVERYONE including both ground and air crew to the same security standard passengers have to go through, why can't America do the same? When other countries are required by the US to screen to a standard the US defined but they don't do that themselves in America, is that hypocrisy or what?



A310/A319/20/21/A332/3/A343/6/A388/B732/5/7/8/B742/S/4/B752/B763/B772/3/W/E145/J41/MD11/83/90
25 USAirways787 : SIDA badge holders are not considered the general public, we have been through extensive background checks, screening and even have all 10 of our fing
26 JRadier : And in Europe we just walk in and go airside? We get screened as well! Ok, humor me. How is your (or any other aviation job) in the US fundamentally
27 USAirways787 : Never been to Europe so I can't answer that question first hand. But I should assume since it's done in Europe it should be done in America? Maybe th
28 Airbalticfan : What has happened to this pilot is a direct result of September 11.We are so afraid of everything, that couple of youtube videos can land four federal
29 JRadier : Certainly not! That would be one of the worst reasons to implement such a thing. My point that one shouldn't assume that because it is not being done
30 cbphoto : I think we are in agreement with the same argument. But to take your example, why should you be exempt from security, when pilots, who ultimately are
31 USAirways787 : Whether you are a pilot or a ramper makes no difference to me. You have a badge you have that privilege for that airport unless you hold them for oth
32 AirNZ : How exactly would it affect the ability to do your job?
33 USAirways787 : I never said it would my job directly. I said it would affect a lot of peoples jobs such ticket counter agents gate agents who constantly go in and ou
34 adam42185 : I will keep this in mind when I become an airline pilot someday if the TSA doesn't get seriously re-worked. Interesting that it works that way, get a
35 Crewchief : This thread is revealing. One side is arguing that more extensive security is impractical, and the other says today's "security" is a sham. One does n
36 Silver1SWA : Uhh, as far as I know even after being screened at checkpoints, pilots and flight attendants don't have free roam around the ramp. I believe they must
37 MattRB : And yet, we still have employees committing theft & smuggling drugs (two employees here were just busted for such a thing). A background check do
38 Post contains images cbphoto : Attitude? What Attitude, I was merely agreeing with a lot of what you said, so get off your high horse! And if you really think all us "pilots" do is
39 aa43e : I disagree. The video did illustrate what has been said here before. Pilots, who are already in charge in the aircraft are being searched for no good
40 freakydeaky : PIlots, flight attendants, and customers - those that have the most to lose - are the only entities screened. Those that have unlimited and unquestion
41 DTWSXM : Thank you for some sane perspective. The only valid reason for having crew go through is to prevent someone from impersonating crew member to bypass
42 cbphoto : This is true, and a very valid point. I know one easy (cheap) way to get around this. If you are in CASS (the jumpseat system) your Employee number w
43 fxramper : The background screen that airlines run to give an employee a SIDA is the same as any other normal screen. It consists of a '28 Crimes check' and not
44 soon7x7 : The information portrayed in the pilots video is right on...the only presence of the TSA in airports is in terminals where the thoroughfare of the fly
45 ScottB : That's no consolation at all. The terrorist organizations who want to bring down our planes aren't stupid, and it likely would not be all that diffic
46 PanHAM : That's no argument at all. Here in FRA it cost about € 30 million to build the check points and fo course it costs daily to staff and maintain the
47 Silver1SWA : I think in many ways, life without the TSA would be MUCH easier for the airlines...
48 Post contains images Kaiarahi : Same in Canada. I have to show up for flights two hours before departure. That's taking time out of my life that I'm not getting paid for. Why should
49 planesmith : BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU! The terrorists have won - why can't you just accept that. You have surrendered all your rights to those for whom you didn
50 saab2000 : This is totally incorrect. Most pilots are screened most of the time. There are some exceptions which is why I say 'most'. But even having a SIDA bad
51 saab2000 : BTW, for those who are whining about going through security as employees, there are times when I too am forced to go in and out of the secure side sev
52 ltbewr : I am quite sure DHS and TSA wanted to make an example of this pilot for filming a security area, which is illegal per Federal law to deter others, esp
53 PanHAM : I always thought that the USA, like any other democracy, knows the division of powers. How come that a part of the executive branch can "make an exam
54 AirNZ : However, unless you are seeing something which I don't, the 'executive branch' has not decided/declared any punishment. They have acted under their s
55 mccarranmgr : It is not incorrect. The majority of flight crews are not subject to screening if they have a SIDA badge at their base airport. The reason why it wou
56 flynlr : the fort hood shooter major assasn had at least a TS clearance proving the clearances only mean as much as the peeps that hold them.
57 EDICHC : I would ask a diiferent question...how many innocent persons were killed in the US by LEOs discharging their firearms (i.e. accidentally caught in li
58 AirNZ : Then in which case, if the US is incapable of carrying out specific tasks why does it require other countries to do so? Is this simple hypocrisy, or
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Go Airlines Pilot Couldn't Land At Foggy London! posted Fri Mar 22 2002 21:37:32 by Capt.Picard
Jetstar A320 In Go-around Incident At MEL posted Thu Mar 4 2010 22:57:44 by kaitak
Becoming A Pilot At Emirates posted Sat Feb 20 2010 21:39:20 by Bozo
LAX Spotting, At Home Style! posted Mon Dec 28 2009 13:33:06 by N737MC
Drunk S7 Pilot At FRA posted Sun Oct 11 2009 07:50:58 by Tobias2702
Jet2 Boss Warned After Raging At Check-in Staff posted Wed Sep 23 2009 11:05:02 by Ferengi80
G-YMMR B772ER Arrives At Home Base posted Mon Jun 1 2009 07:25:02 by Rutankrd
TSA Agents Searching Bags At The Gate? posted Sun Feb 1 2009 07:17:40 by Lincoln
SWA To Go After LGA Slots posted Tue Nov 18 2008 18:05:07 by OPNLguy
BA 744 Go Round Today At PHX? posted Thu May 8 2008 17:53:51 by BristolFlyer